Koran burning on anniversary of 9/11 examined by Dr. Richard Land

Gen. David H. Petraeus on Tuesday denounced plans by a Florida church to burn copies of the Koran this weekend, saying the demonstration could "endanger troops" and damage the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan.

The Dove World Outreach Center, a 50-member evangelical Christian church in Gainesville, Fla., announced plans to burn the Islamic holy books on Saturday, the ninth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. At the Kabul protest, residents burned an effigy of Dove World pastor Terry Jones.

Dr. Land has said, "I think it is appalling, disgusting and brainless ... I think that those of us who find what they are doing abhorrent should say so, and say so publicly and often." Land added that the church's actions "besmirch the reputation of our Savior, and that makes it blasphemy."

Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, was online Tuesday, Sept. 7, at 2 p.m. ET to address the controversy.

____________________

Dr. Richard Land: Good afternoon. Dr. Richard Land here, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, public policy and moral concerns agency of Southern Baptists. I'll be happy to take your questions and chat live with you on the Washington Post.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: Dear Dr. Land, I am ashamed and embarrassed that this publicity seeking minister and his flock have decided that it is ever okay to burn sacred texts. How is this different from publicly planned anti-Semitic demonstrations in which Torahs and other Jewish sacred books would be burned?

I cannot believe the church is so lost to all sense of morality that they would endanger our troops and our civilian population here at home by trying to drum up hatred against Americans. But to me, that is not the worst part of their sin. The worst part is the fear they are instilling among decent fellow Americans and others around the world who are Muslim and simply ask to be treated with basic respect. To try to terrorize and dehumanize them in this way reaches back to a legacy of lynching that I thought the South had finally moved beyond.

Calling this behavior Christian would be absolutely laughable if they weren't so dumb that they thought it really did reflect Christ's teachings. I can only hope that they will pray, listen to advisors they respect, and call off this brutal hate stunt -- the exact opposite of any memorial the victims of 9/11 would want or deserve.

Dr. Richard Land: To Arlington and Fairfax, the behavior of this church is not Christian. I cannot imagine Christ burning any religious texts. This behavior is unfortunately one of the prices we pay for living in a free society with freedom of speech and freedom of expression, even when it is odious and reprehensible. I believe it is incumbent upon Christians across the country to denounce this action by this local church and its pastor. To make it as clear as possible that they do not speak for any sizable portion of the Christian faith community in any way, shape or form.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Regardless of what I may think of burning religious material, is this the place for a military officer to make political statements, even if it's limited to "Don't burn, it could come back by harming our troops"? Wouldn't it -- shouldn't it -- be more appropriate for a senior, civilian, member of the Department of Defense [to] be the person making the statement than a theater-commander? Even if that commander is General Petraeus?

Dr. Richard Land: I understand the concerns of Washington, D.C. However, General Petraeus is the direct general commander in the theater and it's his troops who will be the most immediately endangered by the reprehensible actions of this church. Frankly, if my son were in the army I would want him to have a commander like that. It will probably have more impact both on the American and the Afghan general population coming from General Petraeus then it would from a civilian official with the possible exception of the president.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Why is this backlash (right word?) against Islam happening NOW as opposed to say, shortly after September 11, 2001 or any other time? I'd prefer not to see it at all, but at least a trigger like September 11 would make it understandable. It's striking how recently there seem to be all these anti-Islamic movements afoot. The book burning, the protests against the Islamic center in southern Manhattan, even claims that the president is a Muslim (which imply that's a bad thing). Why now?

Dr. Richard Land: To be honest, I don't know. It may have something to do with frustration and fatigue with Iraq and Afghanistan. It may also be fed by bad economic times. Hostility towards others who are dissimilar to oneself tend to be exacerbated in hard economic times. As for the belief by some that the president is a Muslim, I guess all I can say is 6 percent of Americans think Elvis is alive. Go figure!

_______________________

Texas: At what point does this book burning of a holy book become the man shouting fire in a crowded theater? I believe in religious freedom and the right to free speech, but this 9/11 book burning, according to Gen. Petraeus, could endanger lives. It is bad enough that people are burning religious books, but to endanger our troops and our national security makes this act wrong on so many levels. Have other pastors tried to talk sense to this guy?

Dr. Richard Land: I don't know if any other pastors have tried to reason with this pastor. I hope so. The only thing more dangerous than what this pastor is doing would be to allow the government to interfere. This would set a terrible precedent and would diminish all our First Amendment rights. The best way to combat this is to exercise our free speech right to condemn what he is doing in the simplest way and most direct terms.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Do you think Terry Jones will reconsider?

Dr. Richard Land: I and certainly many others are praying that he will do so.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: Jones said his message is one of warning to Muslims, to the radical element. How dangerous might this turn out to be if in fact the Koran is burned?

Dr. Richard Land: Well, if the Koran is burned there are elements within Islam which will react violently. This would feed a cycle of violence in which acts by Muslim extremists would become self-fulfilling prophecies. It would in turn breed more hostility for Muslims in the general population. Sadly, there is a long history of this kind of scenario playing out to the determent of all involved.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: I've recently read somebody said "We'll stop burning the Koran when they stop burning American flags." What gets me is for that logic to work, the action of a few fanatics (who happen to be Muslim) must be the action of the entire religion (which it isn't). People protesting the actions of the American government are correct in burning the American flag. However, the Koran is the holy book of an entire religion. When McVeigh blew up the Murrah building, would it be right to react by burning bibles?

Protest the actions of Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc., by burning their flags but do not treat the entire religion as terrorists.

Dr. Richard Land: I'm not sure I would agree with your analogies here. For many Americans, the flag is treated as a consecrated if not sacred symbol which is acknowledged by the rules and regulations regarding its treatment in the military. However, as a Christian I would certainly not equate the American flag with sacred texts of various religions even though I honor it greatly. I'm not sure I get the McVeigh reference. McVeigh wasn't doing what he was doing in the name of the Christian faith, but out of a warped sense of betrayal he felt from the U.S. Federal government. To be blunt, there is no justification for burning or desecrating anyone's sacred and religious texts, period.

_______________________

Senior civilian official more appropriate?: I don't understand the logic behind that question -- why would a civilian official be more appropriate than a commanding general? I would think the general's words would hold a lot of influence.

And as ashamed as I am of that church and its members, I am more ashamed of the political leaders in this country, who have been distressingly silent.

Dr. Richard Land: I guess the logic is we have civilian control to the military, thank God. Consequently, some would feel it's inappropriate for a military official to respond to a free speech issue in the United States, which is a civilian issue. Some would think that such an issue should be dealt with by civilian personnel in the Department of Defense. I share the concern that we maintain and emphasize civilian control, but I also think in this particular circumstance, General Petraeus was correct in responding. I do however believe it should be the exception rather than the rule.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Jones said he and others in his congregation are praying about it: "Jones told CNN that 'we have firmly made up our mind' to carry out the Koran burnings, 'but at the same time, we are definitely praying about it.' He said his group is 'weighing the situation.'" Your comments?

Dr. Richard Land: I hope they keep praying about it and decide not to do it. Nothing good can come of it.

_______________________

Ignore him? : What would happen if we just ignored him? What if no one covered it? Or is that just impossible in the 24-hour, YouTube news cycle?

Dr. Richard Land: They might be less likely to do it, but some people with nefarious motives would cover it, if not here, then overseas in an attempt to whip up anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world.

_______________________

Washington, D.C. : What is your position on the proposed building of an Islamic center with a place of worship in it near Ground Zero in NYC?

Dr. Richard Land: I believe people have the right to have places of worship in the communities where they live. I have an editorial in today's Nashville Tennessean "Religious Liberty an American Right" in which I defend the building of a mosque in Murfreesboro, TN. However, I believe the right to have places of worship everywhere you live does not mean the right to have them ANYWHERE in the everywhere you live. I believe in the particular case of the mosque and the Islamic center near Ground Zero, the ultimate voice must be given to those who suffered the most on 9/11 namely the family members and relatives of the victims who died there. If they think (and they do) that the Islamic center is too close then it's too close to the hallowed ground of Ground Zero. The Muslim community will in no way be discomfited by moving two or three blocks further away. If the Islamic center's sponsors desire is to truly build greater inter-faith understanding and cooperation, they will agree to move a little further away.

This in no way should be seen as scapegoating Muslims or directing any hostility to them or their community. It has been almost 69 years since the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and I know of no Americans under 80 who have any animus toward the Japanese people or the nation of Japan, (which has been our ally for over half a century. Still most Americans would still consider it inappropriate in simply not good manners to building a Japanese Shinto Shrine two blocks from the U.S.S. Arizona.)

_______________________

Frederick Md.: Are other evangelical churches/pastors telling Jones not to do it? Do you think he will listen to them? Do you think he bit off more than he could chew in the ongoing Muslim controversy?

Dr. Richard Land: I hope so. I know many are issuing public statements condemning the proposed actions of his church. One can only hope and pray he will listen.

_______________________

Reston, Va.: It reminds me of the reaction churches and the KKK had to Lennon's "bigger than Christ" remark. I would say both are protected [by] free speech, but for some reason Christians like to burn things and Muslims like to stone things. They both like to hang people so they have that in common.

Dr. Richard Land: This seems to be a good example of the kinds of religious stereotypes which do a lot of harm in our society and should be avoided by people of good will.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Religious Liberty an American right (Tennessee Opinion, Sept. 7)

_______________________

Omaha, Neb..: Thank you for taking questions today. Are any Christian groups or denominations making formal statements denouncing the actions of this church?

Dr. Richard Land: Yes, many churches have and it's my understanding that the National Association of Evangelicals have issued a condemnation of this church's proposed actions as well.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: "McVeigh wasn't doing what he was doing in the name of the Christian faith, but out of a warped sense of betrayal he felt from the U.S. federal government"

And the 19 hijackers on 9/11 weren't representatives of Islam -- just the warped following of bin Laden and a handful of other crazy people.

We don't hold Christianity accountable for McVeigh so we shouldn't hold Islam accountable for the 9/11 hijackers.

Dr. Richard Land: The McVeigh example is dis-analogous to this situation. McVeigh did not claim to be doing this in the name of Christianity, whereas the terrorists of 9/11 were all avowed followers of Bin Laden's death cult, which has taken root within Islam. Along with the vast majority of Islams, I reject Bin Laden's death cult as being a legitimate expression of Islam. Let's do understand that about 90 percent of the people killed by the radical jihadists have been Muslims that have refused to knuckle under to this perverted and twisted understanding of Islam. For instance, in Iraq there have been approximately 12 uniformed Iraqi soldiers and police who have died defending their own country against this death cult for every uniformed American who has died in that conflict. Nevertheless, the 9/11 hijackers were acting in their understanding of Islam and that is a historical reality with which both American Muslims and those who lost loved ones on 9/11 have to deal.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: I'm a Muslim (by birth, not by practice), I'm not angered by the burning of the Koran so much as angered that someone is burning a book. Isn't book burning (whether religious or not) outlawed?

Dr. Richard Land: Book burning is not outlawed, nor should it be. It is a legitimate expression of free speech. I am personally offended by the burning of any book and am even more offended by the burning of a book perceived as sacred by any religious group. However, once we start allowing the government to make decisions about what is appropriate freedom of expression and what isn't, we are on a deep and slippery slope to a dark and dangerous place.

_______________________

Atlanta, Ga.: "General Petraeus was correct in responding. I do however believe it should be the exception rather than the rule."

Would people say the same thing if it was Gen. Horowitz or Lieutenant General Rahim? I agree with the original post it shouldn't be a military commander making political statements. And my son is in the military.

Dr. Richard Land: I've already said that I think a military commander responding should be the exception rather than the rule, but I'm happy and proud to say that in the United States of America I don't think it would make any difference if it were General Horowitz or Lt. General Rahim who had made the statement.

_______________________

D.C.: Is there any credibility to the rumor that they were planning to burn Jewish texts also?

Dr. Richard Land: I have not heard any such rumors. I would be shocked if they were also planning on burning "Jewish texts." Do you mean the Old Testament? It would seems bizarre for any Christian church to burn what is part of their sacred text namely the Old Testament.

_______________________

Dr. Richard Land: Thank you for the questions and comments. It was a good chat. Let's all remember that we are a minority in the world's population that have the opportunity to have such chats without fear of intervention or reprisal from government authorities. May it ever be so.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.